let me just say that i fully agree with what apple did. blindfold has 70 apps that can be murged in to 5 or 6 difrent apps because their games are just minigames to begin with. they don't in any way deserv as much as blindfold takes. i'm personally happy with what apple did as i said because after all you don't need 70 apps for so many minigames from blindfold. it just fils the store with apps that doesn't need to be there and it's an excuse for marty to release more titles and milk more money out of p

@sidoWhile I agree that they were a little bit overpriced, that wasn't the reason why games got redjected in the first place. So I still agree that what they did was completely outrageous. If blindfold games have existed for a day or two I wouldn't have said something like this, but they existed for years and apple said nothing in the past.

ok but as far as things go, what apple doing are totally wrong. i think game developers should have there games made, in there own way, with no formal assistants from non-developers. specially companies for whatever the name of the company is doing the game, apple shouldn't so much as take over there games. apple should do there own work and not wreck people's gaming world.

@Dark I certainly understand where you're coming from, and it's not that I don't believe him, but at first he gave us the accessibility team to contact, which is used for reporting accessibility bugs, and second he gave us very little info. In no way do I agree with comments such as i'm happy they did it, because if you're happy that we lost games, no matter whether you played them or no then you don't deserve to play any games. I respect his time and what he did, however could he do it much better? Of course. I do agree that most of his 80 games are really just minigames, and let's put it this way. Each his game costs at least 10 dollars, and you do have to pay if you want to play more to get coins. Now, let's count it this way. A person who loves his games will get at least one purchase per game, so that's 80 games, 800 dollars. And that's just one person, not even counting the ridiculously overpriced RS games in here, from which he also gets money and greatly rips off all players who play for free on PC. So if that's not enough of a return of investment, then I think he wanted too much.

Actually Nidsa, very few of his games cost as much as 10 usd, many to buy out right and have unlimited play were considerably less than that, I don't have the stats directly on me since my IPhone is malfunctioning due to battery issues right now, but Marty did listen to the community and alter the prices.

Some recent stats he published said the average people spent was 3 usd per game most games getting 150 paid downloads in the first two months or so and only sporadic after that.

Still the issue is as you said not to do as much with the pricing of the games, as to do with the fact Apple have basically just shut down an established developer of accessible games for what I suspect is basically an accessibility related issue which was not a problem previously, which is certainly not okay.

With our dreaming and singing, Ceaseless and sorrowless we! The glory about us clinging Of the glorious futures we see, Our souls with high music ringing; O men! It must ever be That we dwell in our dreaming and singing, A little apart from ye. (Arthur O'Shaughnessy 1873.)

Well, unless it's a recent change, I thought those games were around dolar 10. Well, i'll try to clear up the issue here, and explain how it's not accessibility related. Basically, the games were too similar to each other. They used similar menu structure, settings screens, and such things. So, it is normal to expect such a thing from Apple. The problem here is that he had a wrong assumption that blind people would find menus too complex if they were different, thus making it seem like it's accessibility related, and to be honest I find RS games more complex than if it just used a standard interface. All the gestures you have to remember, and everything being direct touch for no reason.

It pains me and shames me that the blind community was so easily persuaded to fight, for the wrong side. it amazes me to what depths people will sink for the sake of entertainment and resources, all the while ignoring the amount of resources pulled out of one's pocket just to get at it. Still, to each their own... I suppose.

I do not know what my future holds, but I do know who holds my future.

Glad Apple have seen reason on this one, actually when I got a stat email response I was a little worried.

With our dreaming and singing, Ceaseless and sorrowless we! The glory about us clinging Of the glorious futures we see, Our souls with high music ringing; O men! It must ever be That we dwell in our dreaming and singing, A little apart from ye. (Arthur O'Shaughnessy 1873.)

If marty had actually coded his games as modular, i.e. reusing the universal code like menus and interpreting gestures, and speech and braille, then he could have easily, easily, split the games into a couple different large programs like blindfold card games, blindfold arcade games, blindfold sports sims, blindfold relaxation games, etc, and it would have taken him like 2 to 4 days to code, another week or so to test. Maximum. But no, he has to whine to apple instead. There are two reasons why this might be. 1), he is lazy. That may be the case, as part of the argument on this topic, at least, is that his income stream dries up after a few months, and why do more than add extra in-app purchases to older games? I mean, in his mentality, that's the only way to make more money off an old title. 2), he didn't actually modularize his code. In that case, yeah, it would be way harder to make a compilation program. But really, that's an elementary coding error. Most programming languages, including objective c, have ample built-in tools for code reuse, and if he decided to not use them, that's his own fault. Apple should not be allowing lazy developers to get away with this laziness. And naive people all over the world ate it up. I won't even get into my opinion of the prices of the games and the expansion packs, except I'll say that I agree with nocturnus. Watch out for the pg13 stream about this, it'll be in 8-9 hours.

I like to sleep, Sleep is good,This is how I do it: Lie on a nice warm cozy bed, and dream dreams about how to rule the world!Follow @TheGreatAthlon5 on twitter for humorous facts and game updates!If you like my posts, thumb me up!

Hi,I can see both sides to this. I am happy that another dev hasn't gone down the can, although what was interesting was me, Peter and Ghorth were all talking about this and came to the same conclusions at how different these games are, some had harsher opinions than others though. I, for one, understand that they do fill a niche, that they are good for beginning iPhone users, and some of them are fun. I for one wouldn't mind giving Blindfold Hopper a try one day, along with Blindfold Pinball and Invaders, for instance, even though they are simple. By the same token though, the iPhone is a platform ripe for experimentation and groundbreaking experiences as well, and if Marty is a sighted dev can he try to bring some new genres that we haven't seen before? I'd love a collectable card battler for isntance, although that'd take a while because he'd have to come up with creatures and thigns that won't et him into copyright.

I agree aaron, genre choices are limited with marty's games which is a shame, though I will say on the experimentation front I have enjoyed his arcade games precisely because they use gyroscope and the touch screen to redo classic concepts, eg his breakout game while waving the phone around is actually rather good fun.

pricing wise I don't personally agree given the price to simply unlock the game is comparatively little, usually about a fiver, and one doesn't of course have to unlock every game or buy everything, I'm trying them and getting the ones I like and not the ones I don't which is the best way around, and I will say I have noticed the ease of access with the universal menu structure which is one reason was supportive of his case with Apple.

My personal major problem with marty's games isn't the menu structure or anything else, it is the fact that his design of them is simply one I do not agree with. In most of his games for example, you simply choose one of a number of game modes, then modify that in the settings, there is no progression or sense of unlocking harder levels or working towards something over all, even though in several arcade titles he does allow points to be used to buy power ups.

he also has a tendency to use sounds as modular content separate from gameplay, for example in blindfold pinball, rather than having different tables with different layout and gameplay, he simply has three different table layouts, and then a number of sound skins that can be used. This for me is just a little disappointing and takes away for the exploration factor of the game.

I would personally much rather work towards something, than have all aspects of a game available at the start, but manifestly this is basically just a structural decision and other people might think differently.

With our dreaming and singing, Ceaseless and sorrowless we! The glory about us clinging Of the glorious futures we see, Our souls with high music ringing; O men! It must ever be That we dwell in our dreaming and singing, A little apart from ye. (Arthur O'Shaughnessy 1873.)

@Orko,You won't believe me, but here's the truth; I'm not Apple's biggest fan, anymore than I care for any corporate plastic cheese. when it comes to the overall prioritization of things, propriety software reigns supreme on Apple's platform, which absolutely stinks a thousand times over. Itunes works best for mac users, comfortable media consumption on iOS devices is subject to argument, and prices for devices? Bleh!On the other hand, this is a set of games we're talking about. I remember once upon a time when I didn't pay for anything less than content, particularly content I could use; most everyone else I knew paid for content as well, not graphics and certainly not eardrum bliss. it's interesting to me that we've shifted over and allowed for better audio in the case of the blind community, and graphics in the sighted, to take over where entertainment is concerned. Story plot has taken a backseat where once it was important, playability is questionable, and even more interesting, is that blind people are willing to pay twice as much for content sighted people sometimes get for free! why? Question of the century involving so many debates I feel are soley based on logic that states we don't deserve this or that thing. News flash; even if you consider the concept subjectively, either everyone deserves everything or no one deserves anything, but the fact of the matter is that sighted people are getting ahead by doing rather than sitting around and not doing. True, some are making content others consume, and yes, there are fewer of us than there are of them, but that should give us more incentive to be more productive.Instead, we take and swallow what we get and then get mad when another company comes along and trys to look out for it's, and other people's best interests at the same time. If Apple told FS it charges far too much for screen reading software, I imagine at least half the blind community would disagree. Why? that's a different topic altogether, but I'd say the overall lies in the fact that humanity is a collection of habitual creatures resistent to change. As a result, Apple built it's own screen reader, which I must say is comprable to any on the market, and I can say that having spent the better part of two years using it. It's solid, stable, and well integrated across all of its platforms, giving you a very simple and easy to use interface across all of your devices. Is Apple always right? Of course not, but this time, I honestly think they were.

I do not know what my future holds, but I do know who holds my future.

@Nocturnis,If Apple told FS that they were overpricing their screen reader, I'd support them 1000 times over, unequivocally. FS should be ashamed of what they charge for Jaws, plain and simple. It's price gouging at its best.I'm not totally sure why Apple did what they did with respect to Marty, which is why I never got involved in the discussion. Exactly what was their beef? From what I understand (correct me if I am wrong), they were displeased that apps were too similar? So, does that mean that I am not allowed to create similar apps, I can only have one? Why does it matter to them? How does it affect them at all if I make apps that are similar in nature? Does it somehow affect their profit margin? What is their main goal here? One app per developer?

and that's exactly why i don't bother responding here lol. cuz people are just not willing to understand. apple did what they did cuz marty doesn't need 80 fucking apps to clutter down the store when it's possible to murge them in to blindfold card games with many difrent minigames. kinda like crazy partyi personally think that apple nevre should've allowed marty to keep developing no matter how many emails they get. after all the rules should apply for evreyone no matter if they are blindies or not.i still support apple regarding this desition and i'm not happy that they actually allowed him back to develop.and post 34 gets a point. it's so easy to troll this comunity to rage about something and it's not getting better that they aren't unable to understand the text that the screan reader reads up for them

First of all, there is no need to be rude or snide. Being confused or not understanding something in its entirety does not make someone stupid, nor does it warrant that sort of attitude. I try to respect everyone here when I post, and even when I disagree with another's idea, I try my best to be objective and fair, to look at it from both sides. I should be afforded that same courtesy. Secondly, I still fail to see how it affects Apple's profit margin whether a developer has one, or eighty apps, in their store. Their profit margin doesn't suffer at all. Given that they are in business, I suspect that their bottom line is the most important thing to them, and since I can see no way that this would adversely affect that, I fail to see why they care. In fact, I'd think that the more apps a dev has, the more money Apple gets, since they take a percentage off of each purchase.

I heard that there was a petition to change that, since I think it would be hard for Marti to develop a central app where you can download or play the games using a central server, as in the case of RS Games or Quentinc's Playroom. You could try and make a whole bunch of little apps inside one big app, like in the case of Kitchen's Inc, but you'd need a lot of space. I think that's why Apple rejected them, because he was putting out too many apps instead of one big app with small apps inside of it.

But again, why the fuck would they care whether a dev has one, or eighty apps? It doesn't affect their profit margin at all. It's not like they are going to lose money. In fact, they get a percentage of every purchase, so isn't their bottom line improved with more apps and more purchases?

The reason they rejected his apps was because he was releasing multiple versions of the same app, i.e, bowling and bowling with friends. It's not necessary to do that. I'm on Apple's side on this 1. If I made card games and other games of that nature, I'd probably do it better, and I'd do it for a lower price. All the games put together cost almost as much as the IPhone X or Jaws, and that's absolutely ridiculous . I wouldn't charge more than $15. Now onto blindfold RSGames. why would you make an RSGames client if you already have card games yourself, and why are you paying just for the IOS version? If you really want to play RSGames on IOS, just use the web client. Also, it's rated age 4+ on the app store despite the fact that they have cards against humanity on there.